HHS awards $783.6M contract to Novitas Solutions for health insurance carrier services over 9 years
Contract Overview
Contract Amount: $783,608,655 ($783.6M)
Contractor: Novitas Solutions, Inc.
Awarding Agency: Department of Health and Human Services
Start Date: 2012-09-17
End Date: 2022-01-31
Contract Duration: 3,423 days
Daily Burn Rate: $228.9K/day
Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION
Number of Offers Received: 2
Pricing Type: COST PLUS AWARD FEE
Sector: Healthcare
Official Description: IGF::OT::IGF
Place of Performance
Location: CAMP HILL, CUMBERLAND County, PENNSYLVANIA, 17011
Plain-Language Summary
Department of Health and Human Services obligated $783.6 million to NOVITAS SOLUTIONS, INC. for work described as: IGF::OT::IGF Key points: 1. Contract value represents significant investment in health insurance administration. 2. Long duration suggests a need for stable, long-term support. 3. Cost-plus award fee structure incentivizes performance but requires careful oversight. 4. Single awardee indicates potential for concentrated risk and limited market testing. 5. Geographic focus on Pennsylvania may limit broader applicability of findings. 6. Contract type suggests a complex service requiring ongoing adjustments and performance metrics.
Value Assessment
Rating: fair
The contract's total value of $783.6 million over approximately 9 years averages to about $87 million annually. Benchmarking this against similar contracts for health insurance carriers is challenging without more specific service details. However, the cost-plus award fee structure implies that the final price is tied to performance, which can lead to variability. Without detailed performance data and comparison to other carriers performing similar functions, assessing the true value-for-money is difficult. The contract's duration and scale suggest a substantial commitment, but the pricing mechanism requires scrutiny to ensure it remains competitive and efficient.
Cost Per Unit: N/A
Competition Analysis
Competition Level: full-and-open
This contract was awarded under full and open competition, indicating that multiple bidders were likely considered. The presence of two bids suggests a moderate level of competition for this significant contract. While two bidders are better than one, a higher number of bids typically leads to more robust price discovery and potentially lower costs for the government. The specific details of the bidding process and the evaluation criteria would be necessary to fully assess the effectiveness of the competition in securing the best value.
Taxpayer Impact: Full and open competition, even with two bidders, provides a baseline for price comparison and encourages contractors to offer competitive terms. This helps ensure taxpayer dollars are used more efficiently compared to sole-source or limited competition scenarios.
Public Impact
Beneficiaries include Medicare beneficiaries in Pennsylvania who rely on the carrier for claims processing and related services. Services delivered encompass the administration of health insurance programs, likely including claims processing, provider services, and beneficiary support. Geographic impact is primarily focused on the state of Pennsylvania, affecting healthcare providers and patients within that region. Workforce implications include employment opportunities within Novitas Solutions and potentially for subcontractors supporting the contract.
Waste & Efficiency Indicators
Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10
Warning Flags
- Cost-plus award fee contracts can lead to cost overruns if performance metrics are not tightly controlled.
- Long contract durations increase the risk of contractor performance degradation over time.
- Limited competition (two bidders) may not have yielded the most cost-effective solution.
- Reliance on a single awardee concentrates risk and reduces flexibility.
Positive Signals
- Awarded through full and open competition, suggesting a structured procurement process.
- The contract's long duration indicates a stable, ongoing need for these essential services.
- The award fee structure incentivizes contractor performance and quality of service delivery.
Sector Analysis
The healthcare insurance carrier sector is a critical component of the U.S. healthcare system, responsible for administering vast sums of money for government programs like Medicare and Medicaid. This contract falls within the administrative and support services segment of this sector. Spending in this area is substantial, driven by the complexity of healthcare regulations and the need for efficient claims processing and beneficiary services. Comparable spending benchmarks would typically involve analyzing other contracts for Medicare Administrative Contractors (MACs) or similar entities managing large government health insurance portfolios.
Small Business Impact
Information regarding small business set-asides or subcontracting plans is not explicitly provided in the data. However, for a contract of this magnitude and nature, it is common for prime contractors to engage small businesses for specialized services or administrative support. The absence of specific set-aside information suggests that small business participation may not have been a primary driver or may have been addressed through general subcontracting requirements rather than specific set-asides for this particular award.
Oversight & Accountability
Oversight for this contract would typically be managed by the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS), a division of HHS. Mechanisms likely include regular performance reviews, audits, and adherence to the terms of the Cost Plus Award Fee (CPAF) structure, which requires detailed reporting and justification of costs and performance. Transparency is facilitated through contract award databases and potentially through Inspector General reports if any issues arise. The Inspector General for HHS would have jurisdiction over investigations into fraud, waste, or abuse related to this contract.
Related Government Programs
- Medicare Administrative Contractor (MAC) contracts
- Medicaid fiscal agent contracts
- Health Insurance Marketplace support contracts
- Federal Employee Health Benefits (FEHB) program administration
Risk Flags
- Contract duration exceeds typical service periods, increasing long-term risk.
- Cost-plus award fee structure requires diligent oversight to manage costs.
- Limited competition (2 bidders) may not have secured optimal pricing.
- Single awardee concentrates risk and reduces market pressure.
Tags
healthcare, hhs, cms, definitive-contract, cost-plus-award-fee, full-and-open-competition, large-contract, insurance-carriers, medicare, pennsylvania
Frequently Asked Questions
What is this federal contract paying for?
Department of Health and Human Services awarded $783.6 million to NOVITAS SOLUTIONS, INC.. IGF::OT::IGF
Who is the contractor on this award?
The obligated recipient is NOVITAS SOLUTIONS, INC..
Which agency awarded this contract?
Awarding agency: Department of Health and Human Services (Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services).
What is the total obligated amount?
The obligated amount is $783.6 million.
What is the period of performance?
Start: 2012-09-17. End: 2022-01-31.
What is the historical spending trend for this specific contract or similar contracts awarded to Novitas Solutions?
Analyzing historical spending for this specific contract (ID: 524114) reveals a total award value of $783,608,655.31 over its duration from September 17, 2012, to January 31, 2022. This represents an average annual expenditure of approximately $87 million. To provide a comprehensive trend, data on annual disbursements, any modifications to the contract value, and the contractor's performance against budget would be necessary. Comparing this to other contracts Novitas Solutions may hold for similar services would also illuminate their spending patterns and market position within the federal health insurance administration sector.
How does the pricing structure (Cost Plus Award Fee) compare to other contracts for similar health insurance carrier services?
The Cost Plus Award Fee (CPAF) structure used for this contract allows the contractor to recover allowable costs plus a fee that is adjusted based on performance against specific criteria. This structure is common for complex services where performance outcomes are critical and can be objectively measured. Compared to fixed-price contracts, CPAF can offer more flexibility but requires robust oversight to prevent cost escalation. Other similar contracts might utilize Fixed-Price Incentive (FPI) or Cost Plus Incentive Fee (CPIF) structures, which also tie profit to performance but with different cost-sharing mechanisms. The effectiveness of CPAF hinges on well-defined performance metrics and fair evaluation, ensuring value for taxpayer money.
What are the key performance indicators (KPIs) used to determine the award fee for Novitas Solutions?
The specific Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) used to determine the award fee for Novitas Solutions are not detailed in the provided data. However, for contracts involving health insurance carriers, typical KPIs often include metrics related to claims processing accuracy and timeliness, call center response times and customer satisfaction, provider network management, compliance with federal regulations (e.g., HIPAA), and the efficiency of payment systems. The 'award fee' component suggests that performance above a baseline level is rewarded, incentivizing the contractor to exceed expectations in these critical areas. A thorough review of the contract's Statement of Work (SOW) and Performance Work Statement (PWS) would be required to identify the precise KPIs.
What is the track record of Novitas Solutions in managing large federal health contracts, particularly with CMS?
Novitas Solutions has a significant track record in managing large federal health contracts, particularly with the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS). As indicated by this contract (ID: 524114), they have been a key player in administering Medicare services in Pennsylvania. Their experience likely extends to other regions and potentially other government health programs. A comprehensive assessment of their track record would involve examining past performance evaluations, any contract disputes or penalties, their ability to meet performance targets across multiple contracts, and their overall reputation within the healthcare administration sector for reliability and efficiency.
How has the geographic focus on Pennsylvania impacted the overall cost and service delivery compared to a national scope?
The geographic focus on Pennsylvania for this specific contract likely influences costs and service delivery by concentrating resources and operational efforts within a defined region. This can lead to efficiencies in managing provider networks and understanding state-specific healthcare landscapes. However, it also means that the contract's scope is limited, and its findings may not be directly generalizable to national operations, which often involve greater complexity and diversity. If CMS sought national coverage, it might have opted for multiple regional contracts or a single, larger national contract, potentially with different pricing dynamics due to scale and scope.
What are the potential risks associated with a single awardee for such a critical health insurance administration function?
A single awardee for a critical function like health insurance administration presents several potential risks. Firstly, there's a risk of vendor lock-in, where the government has limited leverage if performance declines or costs increase, as switching contractors is a lengthy and complex process. Secondly, a sole provider may face less pressure to innovate or maintain high service levels due to a lack of direct competition. Thirdly, operational disruptions at the contractor's end (e.g., system failures, labor disputes) could have a widespread impact on beneficiaries and providers in the covered region. Finally, the absence of competitive tension might lead to less favorable pricing over the long term.
Industry Classification
NAICS: Finance and Insurance › Insurance Carriers › Direct Health and Medical Insurance Carriers
Product/Service Code: SOCIAL SERVICES › SOCIAL SERVICES
Competition & Pricing
Extent Competed: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION
Solicitation Procedures: NEGOTIATED PROPOSAL/QUOTE
Solicitation ID: RFPCMS20120003
Offers Received: 2
Pricing Type: COST PLUS AWARD FEE (R)
Evaluated Preference: NONE
Contractor Details
Address: 1800 CENTER ST, CAMP HILL, PA, 17011
Business Categories: Category Business, Corporate Entity Not Tax Exempt, Not Designated a Small Business, Special Designations, U.S.-Owned Business
Financial Breakdown
Contract Ceiling: $970,767,109
Exercised Options: $970,767,109
Current Obligation: $783,608,655
Actual Outlays: $33,433,694
Subaward Activity
Number of Subawards: 19
Total Subaward Amount: $19,815,258
Contract Characteristics
Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL PRODUCTS/SERVICES PROCEDURES NOT USED
Cost or Pricing Data: NO
Timeline
Start Date: 2012-09-17
Current End Date: 2022-01-31
Potential End Date: 2022-01-31 00:00:00
Last Modified: 2024-09-16
More Contracts from Novitas Solutions, Inc.
- THE Purpose of This Contract IS to Obtain Services for the Jurisdiction H (part a and B) Medicare Administrative Contractor (MAC). the Contractor Will Provide Specified Health Insurance Benefit Administration Services, Including Medicare Claims Processing and Payment Services, in Support of the Medicare Program (also Known AS the Medicare Fee-For-Service, or FFS, Program) for Jurisdiction H. Jurisdiction H Includes the Following States: Arkansas, Colorado, Louisiana, Mississippi, NEW Mexico, Oklahoma, and Texas — $890.0M (Department of Health and Human Services)
- Jurisdiction H A/B MAC Contract — $861.1M (Department of Health and Human Services)
- A/B MAC Jurisdiction L — $458.7M (Department of Health and Human Services)
- Jurisdiction 12 Part A/B Medicare Administrative Contractor — $439.1M (Department of Health and Human Services)
- THE Contractor Shall Properly Issue And/Or Revoke Medicare Supplier Billing Privileges for Dmepos Suppliers and Maintain Supplier Files in Pecos That Contain Information Collected VIA the Medicare Enrollment Application, Internet-Based Pecos, and the — $47.4M (Department of Health and Human Services)
Other Department of Health and Human Services Contracts
- Contact Center Operations (CCO) — $5.5B (Maximus Federal Services, Inc.)
- TAS::75 0849::TAS Oper of Govt R&D Goco Facilities — $4.8B (Leidos Biomedical Research Inc)
- THE Purpose of This Contract IS to Provide the Full Complement of Services Necessary to Care for UC in ORR Custody Including Facilities Set-Up, Maintenance, and Support Internal and Perimeter (IF Applicable) Security, Direct Care and Supervision Inc — $3.5B (Rapid Deployment Inc)
- Contact Center Operations — $2.6B (Maximus Federal Services, Inc.)
- Federal Contract — $2.4B (Leidos Biomedical Research Inc)
View all Department of Health and Human Services contracts →